Spring Break
RIAA requests file-sharing info from UA
Eric Evridge
Issue date: 4/30/08 Section: News
"They had to go through a lot of steps to get to this point. The RIAA attorneys may have sent a letter to the IT department saying whatever," he said. "They would have to file the letter to the official copy right officer, though. It would have to be registered to the copy right officer, who is in Little Rock, and it must be filed properly."
Once the letter is filed properly there, anything that pertains to UA campus students is forwarded back to Craig Brown from the IT department, and then an attempt to identify the person continues, he said.
"If no connection is found at the time or no person can be identified, then we notify the copy right officer and nothing more is done on our campus," Flanagin said.
How the UA identifies students breaking the rules is unclear.
"There's no way to know," Flanagin said, when asked if there was a problem with students using another student's computer to illegally share or download music. "It's like open Internet networks - there's no way to know."
Students should be aware that the UA doesn't give any legal advice and students should consult a personal lawyer should they receive a letter, he said.
An article published late last year highlighted the constitutional battle between downloaders and prosecutors.
Ned Snow, an assistant professor at the UA, argued in an article titled "Copytraps" that the automatic penalties for downloading illegally violate the First Amendment and are far too harsh.
Internet users face "copytraps," which is to say that when users encounter Web sites that falsely represent something as legal, sometimes there's no way of knowing whether the downloading is actually illegal.
"The very potential for 'copytraps,' with automatic penalties assessed against the innocent downloader, raises First Amendment concern," Snow said in the article. "The First Amendment comes into play because downloading is a form of speech. Downloading is the same as copying, and copying is a form of expression."
Once the letter is filed properly there, anything that pertains to UA campus students is forwarded back to Craig Brown from the IT department, and then an attempt to identify the person continues, he said.
"If no connection is found at the time or no person can be identified, then we notify the copy right officer and nothing more is done on our campus," Flanagin said.
How the UA identifies students breaking the rules is unclear.
"There's no way to know," Flanagin said, when asked if there was a problem with students using another student's computer to illegally share or download music. "It's like open Internet networks - there's no way to know."
Students should be aware that the UA doesn't give any legal advice and students should consult a personal lawyer should they receive a letter, he said.
An article published late last year highlighted the constitutional battle between downloaders and prosecutors.
Ned Snow, an assistant professor at the UA, argued in an article titled "Copytraps" that the automatic penalties for downloading illegally violate the First Amendment and are far too harsh.
Internet users face "copytraps," which is to say that when users encounter Web sites that falsely represent something as legal, sometimes there's no way of knowing whether the downloading is actually illegal.
"The very potential for 'copytraps,' with automatic penalties assessed against the innocent downloader, raises First Amendment concern," Snow said in the article. "The First Amendment comes into play because downloading is a form of speech. Downloading is the same as copying, and copying is a form of expression."
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
Adam
posted 4/30/08 @ 10:11 AM CST
I say good. Students who think stealing intellectual property is wrong and that thanking artists is good won't be punished, only those who try and justify theft will. (Continued…)
Remembering Napster Times
posted 4/30/08 @ 2:44 PM CST
Remember the good old days of Napster in the dorms? Ahhhhh.
Adam, this file sharing is not about money not going to the artists, it's about it not going to the fat coorp exects. (Continued…)
Adam
posted 5/01/08 @ 2:12 PM CST
If the artists want people to have their music for free, they can do what Radiohead did. If they don't, they don't have to sign with a label. They own their intellectual property, not me, and I don't have the right to steal it whether I think its good for the artist or not. (Continued…)
Ridiculous
posted 9/01/08 @ 2:50 PM CST
Eric, thanks for the article. IMO it's just ridiculous the steps the RIAA is taking in all their greed.
Gentry
posted 9/05/08 @ 7:43 AM CST
The only people who are worried about the RIAA requesting the owners of IP addresses are those people who have violated copyright laws. Here's an idea: if you don't want to be held liable for copyright infringement, don't steal intellectual property. (Continued…)
Post a Comment